Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,488 Year: 3,745/9,624 Month: 616/974 Week: 229/276 Day: 5/64 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution as an Algorithm
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5948 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 23 of 74 (345374)
08-31-2006 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Woodsy
08-30-2006 7:48 AM


There is always an escape clause
Woodsy writes:
If one can show that the description of the evolution algorithm is correct and if one can show that biological systems do exhibit reproduction with variation, and that selection operates, surely one should then expect evolution to occur. If these requirements are satisfied, is that sufficient for confidence in the ToE?
For some yes, and others, no.
Even if you could replicate data for the many variables (don't forget environment) over a time period and predict a new species that actually exists, you would run into the following argument:
1. That is one explanation, but not the only possibility.
2. Another possibility, as written in __religious document__ is that God/Allah/etc. created it.
The algorithm approach is similar to what I would call a pattern. I see a pattern of change in all aspects of life, not just biology (that's why I picked "ThingsChange"). For example, the pattern applies to business, culture, and religion, too. Hence, that gives me sufficient confidence without having to write a computer program (which uses languages that have evolved).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Woodsy, posted 08-30-2006 7:48 AM Woodsy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Parasomnium, posted 08-31-2006 9:00 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5948 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 24 of 74 (345375)
08-31-2006 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by nwr
08-30-2006 9:29 PM


Re: Not an algorithm
nwr writes:
One significant point here is that an algorithm, by definition, is non-interactive. You may interact with the computer by providing data, but that's before the algorithm begins to operate. You may interact again, reading the answer, but that is after the algorithm has completed. There is no interaction during the algorithm.
In the classic definition, you are correct, but that is getting muddy these days, especially with machines receiving input from sensors and even other independent devices. The military has some very sophisticated networked devices and sensors that each have algorithms that determine the reaction to interactive input from many concurrent sources.
My point is that there can still be a high-level algorithm governing many small ones, and this concept fits the biological model, too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by nwr, posted 08-30-2006 9:29 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by nwr, posted 08-31-2006 9:38 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024